[Dead Dog]

What they did on this flight was a series of intentional violations of basic airmanship and flight regulations. There is no excuse, ever, for doing that. That doesn't make this any less a tragedy. But it helps explain why it happened.

Uh, well, I hold a Commercial SEL and CFII. Which makes me squat on this forum. However, I do know there is no violation of FARs, or deviation from anything in AIM (I guess that is what your are calling basic airmanship???).

Sorry, but from what we know, the service ceiling was FL41. They were legal, and the airframe probably shouldn't be. The fact that neither could wax poetic like a Shakespearian sonnet about their pending death is irrelevant armchair airmanship.

[Rokke]

You didn't read the information from the NTSB link I gave to Turbopilot. After you've read the report, drop me another note if you still think no FARS were violated. Flying at FL410 was only one link in a long chain.